. . 

THEA NEY GENEIRAL 

Honorable Ed Keys 

County~Attorney 

Ward County 

Monahans, Texas 

Dear Mr. Keys: 

Opinion No. C-629 

Re: Questions relative to 

election of county school 

trustees when the boundaries 

of certain precincts have 

been changed by the Commissioners Court. 

You have requested an opinion on whether, in the 

election to be held.on April 2, 1966, for county school 

trustees in Ward County, the two trustees to be elected 

from commissioners precincts should be elected in accordance 

with the boundaries of the precincts as they now exist or~as 

they will exist under a resolution of the Commissioners Court 

of Ward County which is to take effect on January 1, 1967. 

The resolution, adopted on Novsmber 1, 1965, recites that the 

redivision is being made "for the convenience of the people 

of said County," and that the Court is acting pursuant to 

the provisions of the Constitution of the State of Texas and 

Articles 2351 and 23513 of the Revised Civil Statutes of 

Te'xas D The resolution does not mention precinct offices 

either specifically or in general terms, or in any manner 

undertake to state the effect of the redivision, other 

than as follows in the final paragraph of the resolution: 

"BE IT FURTRRR RESOLVED that such redivision 

shall be effective for all puPposes as of January 1, 

1967, and that the provisions of Section 1 (a) and 

(b), Article 2351&, R.C.S. of Texas, as amended, 

shall apply to such redivision of Ward County, 

Texas; and the County Judge of Ward County, Texas, 

'is hereby authorized and empowered to execute all 

instruments and documents on behalf of the Commissioners Court necessary to carry out the terms 

and provisions hereof. 

Section 1 of Article 2676, Vernon's Civil Statutes, 

reads in part as follows: 
Hon. Ed Keys, page,2 (C- 629)' 

"SeCtion 1. The general management and 

control,of the public free schools and high 

schools in each-county, unless otherwise - 

provided'bylaw shall be vested in five (5) 

~county,sChool,trustees elected from the 

county, one (1) of whom shall be elected 

from the county'at large by the qualified 

voters of the county and one (1) from each 

Commissionerls Precinct by the qualified 

voters of each Commissioner's Precinct who 

shall hold office for a term of two (21 

years. The time for such election shall 

be the first Saturday in April of each 

year; the order for the election of county 

school trustees to be made by the county 

judge at least thirty (30) 'days prior to 

the date of said election, and which order. 

shall designate as voting places within 

each common or independent school district 

the same voting place or places at which 

votes are east for the District Trustees 

of said common and independent school 

districts, respectively. * y *'. 

Paragraphs (a) and (b) of Article 2351&, V.C.S., 

enacted in 1965, read as follows: 

"0 a W h enever the Commissioners Court 

changes the boundaries of commissioners 

precincts or of justice precincts, it may 

specify in its order a future date, not 

later than the first day of January following 

the nextgeneral,election, on which the 

changes shall become effective. If an 

election for any precinct office mid 

before the effective date of the order, :. 

tie office shall be filled at the election 

by the voters of the precinct as it will 

exist on the effective date of the change 

Tn boundaries. A person'who has resided 

within the territory embraced in the new 

boundaries for the length of time required 

to be eligible to hold the office shall 

not be rendered ineligible by virtue of 

the precinct’s not having been in existence for that length of time. 

-3051-, 
Hon. Ed Keys, page 3 (c-629) 

"(b) When bouridaries of commissioners 

precincts are changed, the terms of office 

of the commissioners then in office shall 

not be affected by such change, and'each 

commissiomer shall~be entitled to serve 

for the remainder of the term to which he 

was elected even thou&the change in 

boundaries may have placed'his residence 

outside of the precinct for which he was 

elected." (Emphasis supplied.) 

The answer to your question turns on whether the term 

"precinct office" as used in the underscored' sentence in Article 

23513 is intended to include county schooltrustees'who are 

elected from commissioners precincts. In our opinion, the 

Legislature intended the term to refer only to officers who 

are elected by commissioners precincts and justice precincts 

at the general election for state and county officers on the 

first Tuesday after the firstMonday in November of evennumbered years (Election Code, Art. 2.01), and did not intend 

to include county school trustees within the term. 

It is an elementary rule of statutory construction 

that the meaning of a word or phrase should be determined with 

reference to the context in which it is used, and that the same 

word or phrase may have different meanings in different statutes. 

53 Tex.Jr.2d 214, Statutes, Seo. 147+ Cf. Att'y Gen. Op. 

WW-111OA (1962), holding that county school trustees are not 

county or precinct officers within the meaning of Article XVI, 

Section 64 ofthe Constitution, which provides terms of four 

years for "the elective district, county snd Erecinct offices 

which have heretofore had terms of two years. 

In Attorney General's Opinion Noo. c-580 (1966), it 

was stated that the purpose of paragraph (a 

4 

of Article 23513 

was to change the rule in Brown v. Meeke, 9 S.W.26 839 (Tex. 

Civ.App. 1936, error dism.3, which held that Where an order 

of the commissioners court changing the boundaries of justice 

precincts, entered prior to the filing deadline for,primary 

elections, provided that the changes were to become effective 

on the first 'day of January following the next general election 

and that precinct officers were to be elected at that election 

in accordance with the new boundaries, an attempted nomination 

of a constable for the new precinct was void. That ca6e, it 

should be noted, dealt with an office filled at the general 

election for state and county offices. 

-3052- 
Bon. Ed Keys, page 4 (C-629) 

Article 23513 sets the first day of January following 

"the hext genersl election” a6 the limitation on p'oetpbnement 

of the effective date of the order., Although every election" 

which is held at regular fixed intervals is a general election 

in the broad sense of the term, in common parlance it usually 

means the general election for state and county offices. 

Greenwood v. City of El Paso 

945 ; Att'y Gen. Op. No. C 

186 S.W.2d 1015 (Tex.Civ.App. 

-43 (1963). The fact that Article 

2351 specifies the first day of January following the election 

as the cutoff date for postponing effectiveness is evidence 

that the latter meaning was intended'in this statute.' The 

first day of January coincides with the beginning date of 

regular terms of precinct officers who are elected at the 

biennia1 November general election, Art. 17, V.C.S., and 

obviously this provision is tied in with's recognition of the 

desirability of electing officers'in accordance with the new 

boundaries since the full term of their service will be after 

the change becomes effective. This would not be true of the 

office of county school trustee. In the present case,'for 

example, trustees elected in accordance with the old boundaries 

will serve for almost three-fourths of a year (almost half 

their full term) before the change.. 

Other reasons could also be advanced to support our 

conclusion that county school trustees do not come within the 

provisions of Article 2351*, but we believe the foregoing 

reasons make the legislative intent clear enough without 

further development. It is our opinion that the coming election 

should be conducted in accordance with the commissioner precinct 

boundaries as they now exist. There is nothing in Brown v. 

Meeks, supra, contrary to our holding on this point. In that 

c the court rejected the contention of one of the parties 

that'he was entitled to the nomination for the old precinct, 

but it was on the ground that neither the commissioners court, 

the candidates, nor the voters had understood that the nomination to be made was for the old precinct and not on the ground 

that a valid election for the nomination could not have'been 

held if it had been 80 intended. (In that case, the office of 

constable of the old precinct would not have been in existence , 

on the date of the beginning of the new term, but in this case 

the office for the precinct as it now exists will continue 

for almost 9 months. after the new term of trustee begins.) 

We therefore answer your question by stating that in the 

election to be held on April 2, 1966, a candidate for the 

office must be a resident of the precinct in which he is 

running, as it now exists, and only the voters residing within 

the precinct as it now exists may vote for that office. 

-3053- 
. . 

Hon. Ed Keys, page 5 (C- 629) 

As a further question, you ask for an opinion, In 

thti event our answer to your first question ia thatthe 

clectidn should be held in accordance with presently existing 

boundaries, on'what effect the change ifi~boimdaAes'wil1 have 

dn the stat&of these newly elected~ trustees when the order 

of the commissioners court takes effect ofi January 1; 1967." 

You also ask what ePfCct it Wlll~'heve on the status of the two 

trustees who were elected from commissioners precincts in 

1965 - 

We are of the opinion that both questions are 

controlled by the holding In Childrere”County v. Sachse, 

158 Tex. 371, 312 s.W.2d 380 m9U1,“t.o the effect that a 

change in-precinct boundaries‘does’not create a vacancy in 

the office of county commissioner or deprive the Incumbent 

of the right to hold office for the ,remalnder of his term, 

and this ia true ‘even though by reason of such change his 

residence Is not within the pficlnct aa redefined.” The later 

case of Whitmarsh v. Buckley, 324’&W.2d 298 (Tex.Civ.App. 

1959 

4 

explaindd th e basis oft the holding to be that a county 

comm ssioner, although elected from a.preclnct, serves the 

entire county aa a member of the commirsloners court; that 

he Is elected not to act for just hir precinct but to serve 

the whole county. This Is also true for a county school 

trustee, even to a greater extent than for county commissioner. 

Incidentally, the’rule of the Sachse case was enacted into 

statutory form for the office ofty commissioner in 

paragraph (b) of Article 23513, quoted above. Although the 

statute does not apply to the office of county school trustee, 

the rule -in the Sachlre case by analogy doea apply. We 

therefore hold t-e change in boundaries on January 1, 

1967, will have no effect on the tenure of either the 

trustees elected in 1965 or those elected In 1966. 

Where an order of the cammisrioners coust 

changing the boundaries of commiarioners precincts, to become effective on January 1, 1967, 

was entered in November, 1965, the county school 

trustees who are to be elected from commis6ioners 

precincts in the election to be held on April 2, 

1966, should be elected from the precincts as 

they now exirt rather than aa they will exist on 

January 1, 1967. Article 2351*, V.C.S., doe6 

not apply to the office of county school trustee. 

-3064- 
. . 

Hon. Ed Keys, page 6 (c-629) 

The change in boundariea dti J&nuak$ I;, 1967, 

will have no effect on thi 'tiM.M? of iither'the' 

trustees elected iri 1965"6r those'ilecttid in 

Childress County v. Sachae, 158 Tex. 371, 312 

1966. 

e . 360 [193U) . 

Yours very truly, 

WAGG0RF.R CARR 

Attorney General 

By:a+ %= %cx,ec_ 

Mary K. Wall 

Aseiatant 

MKW:ra:sj 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMKU'TEE 

W. 0. Shultz, Chairman 

John Reeves 

Ralph Rash 

Gordon Case 

Wade Anderson 

APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: T. B. Wright 

-3055-